‘We all know there is no one profile of a violent extremist or terrorist’, said President Obama at the Summit on Countering Violent Extremism (Halper, 2015). This statement has been supported by different scholars suggesting that as there is ‘no one profile’ of a terrorist, there is also ‘no one reason’
to become radicalised. As Fenstermacher discusses:
Terrorism is the result of interactions between human beings – who live in an environment with other individuals and groups, with a government that does or does not meet their needs and expectations, who interact on a daily basis with others, who they may increasingly identify with radicals based on a variety of reasons, who may have experienced trauma and/or perceived discrimination either first hand or indirectly (e.g., Internet videos), who may meet a charismatic leader and/or hear a resonant message that meshes with their psychological vulnerabilities. (Fenstermacher, 2010, p.6)
Since there are various reasons and pathways to extremism, various scholars have discussed and explained the process of radicalisation in a different manner and no general theory has been developed.
Despite that, most of these theories share similar patterns. This is clarified by the Terrorism and Radicalisation Prevention and Learning Programme (TERRA):
Ostensibly, all [theories which TERRA’s research has been focused on - ed.]
document the process through which an ordinary member of the public forms a certain set of beliefs, seeks a group which seems to appropriately reflect them, and ultimately, carries out an act of violence against civilians in the belief that this act will somehow further the aims of this group. (TERRA, 2013, p.11)
Many of the theories indicate discrimination as an imposing factor in the process of radicalisation. The relation between discrimination and radicalisation is that the former fuels the later. In fact, as Dounia Bouzar, a French anthropologist in charge of a mission to de-radicalise candidates for Jihad, asserted:
‘discrimination has been climbing and radicalisation has been climbing. […] It’s a vicious circle’
(Thomson & Stothard, 2015). On the other hand, discrimination is not always direct and in many cases it can be perceived discrimination, which is defined as ‘what people themselves perceive and describe as discrimination, regardless of the consequences’ (The Netherlands Institute for Social Research, 2014, p.9). Below, four main theories indicating discrimination or perceived discrimination as a trigger for radicalisation are presented.
a) Victoroff and Adelman's Muslim Diaspora Community Support for Terrorism is Associated with Perceived Discrimination and Employment Insecurity
The research conducted by Victoroff and Adelman (2010) has actually proved that the support for terrorism from the Muslim communities is influenced by two factors: the amount of perceived discrimination they experience and unemployment. The study is based on the results of two different surveys that have confirmed two primary hypotheses:
1. The opinion that violence against civilian targets is justifiable to defend Islam would be associated with perceived discrimination.
2. The opinion that violence against civilian targets is justifiable to defend Islam would be associated with unemployment (Victoroff & Adelman, 2010).
b) F. Moghaddam's Staircase to Terrorism
F. Moghaddam's Staircase to Terrorism (see Appendix 4) emphasises the factors of discrimination and deprivation as key elements in the beginning of the radicalisation process. According to the scholar, there are six different stages in the process of radicalisation beginning on the ground floor and ending with a terrorist act on the fifth stair. Moghadamm argues that ‘terrorism arises, essentially, when one ethnic, religious, political or even professional group feels that they suffer from deprivation when compared to other groups’ (TERRA, 2013, p.11). He also affirms that ‘although the vast majority of people, even when feeling deprived and unfairly treated, remain on the ground floor, some individuals climb up and are eventually recruited into terrorist organizations’ (Moghadamm, 2005, p.161).
c) Marc Sageman's Four-Stage Process
The other theory proposed by Marc Sageman claims that the process of radicalisation consists of four stages, which can be recurrent and follow different orders. The stage of ‘resonance with personal experiences’ is explained as ‘the interpretation of a Western war against Islam that meshes with perceptions in everyday life where anti-Muslim social, political, economic and religious bias and discrimination are perceived’ (Christmann, 2012, p.13).
d) The New York Police Department's Four-Stage Radicalisation Process
Discrimination is also mentioned in another Four-Stage Radicalisation Process model introduced by The New York Police Department. This theory mentions that during the stage of ‘self-identification’
discrimination is one of the social triggers alongside alienation and racism and can be both real or perceived (Christmann, 2012, p.12).
Identity crisis
The ‘identity crisis’ or ‘identity confusion’, especially when talking about second or third generation Muslims, is a significant reason for individuals (especially in their late teens or early twenties) to become engaged in the process of radicalisation. In reference to the Dutch Muslim youth, AIVD provides the following explanation (the same phenomenon has been noticed among the French and British Muslim youth as well):
These young people are often in search of their identity. They blame Dutch society for not having enough respect for their ethnic and religious community and not in the least for their parents and themselves. Where other foreign youths opt for a more liberal confirmation of their Islamic belief and attach a lot of value to their social development in the Dutch society and others end up in a criminal environment, these youths find something to hold on to in very radical Islamic beliefs. Former Islamistic fighters, who guide them in a recruitment process, give them a sense of self-respect, involvement, brotherhood and identity. (AIVD, 2002, p.11)
Discrimination - real or perceived – is frequently linked to the main causes of the identity crisis. Al Raffie suggests that discrimination, ‘when combined with other factors such as personal crises or religious identity dynamics’, may act as a trigger for self-identity crisis and calls it ‘a source of frustration’ (2013, p.85), while Christmann also discusses discrimination as a cause for identity confusion and affirms that it ‘can be intensified by perceptions or experiences of discrimination, a sense of blocked social mobility, and a lack of confidence in the political system’ (2012, p.24).
4. Governmental policies of France, the UK and the Netherlands in relation to